Volume 20, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1387-6732
  • E-ISSN: 1570-6001
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


The present study examined spell checker software for both spelling recognition and production among college students. Sixty-four participants identified and corrected spelling in a prewritten story and produced spelling by writing a story. Both were completed with or without spell checker access. Results demonstrated differences between the performance of good and poor spellers (as defined using a baseline spelling test). When compared to good spellers, poor spellers corrected a greater percentage of spelling errors with spell checker than without. Spell checker helped all participants produce fewer spelling errors, but not fewer homophone errors. Additionally, more often than good spellers, poor spellers reported placing less effort into spelling words correctly when using spell checker. These findings suggest that poor spellers may have a greater need for spell checker than good spellers, and may be at a greater risk for relying on the software as the only step in the proofreading process.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Anderson-Inman, L. , & Knox-Quinn, C.
    (1996) Spell checking strategies successful students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39, 500–503. Retrieved fromwww.jstor.org/stable/40014042
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bangert-Drowns, R. L.
    (1993) The word processor as an instructional tool: A meta analysis of word processing in writing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 69–93. doi: 10.3102/00346543063001069
    https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543063001069 [Google Scholar]
  3. Behrns, I. , Hartelius, L. , & Wengelin, A.
    (2009) Aphasia and computerized writing aid supported treatment. Aphasiology, 23, 1276–1294. doi: 10.1080/02687030802436892
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030802436892 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bosman, Anna M. T. , van Huygevoort, M. , Bakker, Joep T. A. , & Verhoeven, L.
    (2007) Learning to spell in second grade using the spelling checker. Written & Language Literacy, 10, 163–183. doi: 10.1075/wll.10.2.01bos
    https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.10.2.01bos [Google Scholar]
  5. Burke, D. M. , Mackay, D. G. , Worthley, J. S. , & Wade, E.
    (1991) On the tip of the tongue: What causes word finding failures in young and older adults?Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 542–579. doi: 10.1016/0749‑596X(91)90026‑G
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90026-G [Google Scholar]
  6. Dobrin, D. N.
    (1990) A limitation on the use of computers in composition. In D. H. Holdstein & C. L. Selfe (Eds.), Computers and writing: Theory, research, practice (pp.40–57). New York: Modern Language Association of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Figueredo, L. , & Varnhagen, C. K.
    (2005) Didn’t you run the spell checker? Effects of type of spelling error and use of a spell checker on perceptions of the author. Reading Psychology, 26, 441–448. doi: 10.1080/02702710500400495
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710500400495 [Google Scholar]
  8. Francis, W. N. , & Kucera, H.
    (1982) Frequency analysis of English usage. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Galletta, D. F. , Durcikova, A. , Everard, A. , & Brian, M. J.
    (2005) Does spell checking software need a warning label?Communications of the ACM, 48(7), 82–86. doi: 10.1145/1070838.1070841
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1070838.1070841 [Google Scholar]
  10. Gupta, R.
    (1998) Can spelling checkers help the novice writer?British Journal of Educational Technology, 29, 255–266. doi: 10.1111/1467‑8535.00068
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00068 [Google Scholar]
  11. Harm, M. W. , & Seidenberg, M. S.
    (1999) Phonology, reading acquisition, and dyslexia: insights from connectionist models. Psychological review, 106(3), 491. doi: 10.1037/0033‑295X.106.3.491
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.3.491 [Google Scholar]
  12. Hult, C.
    (1985, March). A study of the effects of word processing on the correctness of student writing. Paper presented at the36th Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Minneapolis, MN.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kreiner, D. S. , Schnakenberg, S. D. , Green, A. G. , Costello, M. J. , & McClin, A. F.
    (2002) Effects of spelling errors on the perception of writers. Journal of General Psychology, 129, 5–17. doi: 10.1080/00221300209602029
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00221300209602029 [Google Scholar]
  14. MacArthur, C. A. , Graham, S. , Haynes, J. B. , & DeLaPaz, S.
    (1996) Spelling checkers and students with learning disabilities: Performance comparisons and impact on spelling. The Journal of Special Education, 30, 35–57. doi: 10.1177/002246699603000103
    https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699603000103 [Google Scholar]
  15. MacKay, D. G.
    (1987) The organization of perception and action: A theory for language and other cognitive skills. New York: Springer-Verlag. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4612‑4754‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4754-8 [Google Scholar]
  16. Mackay, D. G. , & Burke, D. M.
    (1990) Cognition and aging: A theory of new learning and the use of old connections. In Thomas M. Hess (Eds.), Aging and Cognition: Knowledge Organization and Utilization (pp.213–263). North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers. doi: 10.1016/S0166‑4115(08)60159‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)60159-4 [Google Scholar]
  17. Margolin, S. and Abrams, L.
    (2007) Individual differences in young and older adults’ spelling: Do good spellers age better than poor speller?Aging, Neuropsychology and Cognition, 14, 529–544. doi: 10.1080/13825580600826462
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13825580600826462 [Google Scholar]
  18. Plaut, D. C. , McClelland, J. L. , Seidenberg, M. S. , & Patterson, K.
    (1996) Understanding normal and impaired word reading: computational principles in quasi-regular domains. Psychological review, 103(1), 56. doi: 10.1037/0033‑295X.103.1.56
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.56 [Google Scholar]
  19. Russell, C.
    (2009) “It sais I have a D how that be.” Journal of College Science Teaching, 39, 84–86. Retrieved fromwww.etitlib.org/p/105524
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Van Orden, G. C. , Pennington, B. F. , & Stone, G. O.
    (1990) Word identification in reading and the promise of subsymbolic psycholinguistics. Psychological review, 97(4), 488. doi: 10.1037/0033‑295X.97.4.488
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.97.4.488 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): spell checker; spelling; spelling ability; spelling production; spelling recognition
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error